Week 28 - Great Britain F13 ($15,000) - Ilkley (grass)

Oakland2002 · All-time great

RE: Week 28 - Great Britain F13 ($15,000) - Ilkley (grass)

Spectator · All-time great

Oakland 2002, I don't think anyone's been arguing that Andy Murray or Nick Kyrgios or even Kyle Edmund should go to university. They're special talents and it makes sense for them to maximise their talents young. But they are fairly unusual.

The example you give to suggest that people of similar accomplishments in juniors get differing results if they choose to go to university doesn't really prove the point. Andrew Harris partnered Kyrgios to the doubles champtionship at Wimbledon in 2012 ... but got knocked out in the 1st round of singles. He'd made the second round of Roehampton, the second round of Roland Garros, the third round of the AO, and been knocked out in the first round of Traralgon. It was a good career, but not a great one. Kyrgios, by contrast, in his final year of play, won Osaka singles, won Traralgon singles, won the AO singles, got knocked out in the second round of RG, won Roehampton singles, lost 3rd round Wimbledon singles and won Wimbledon doubles. It was pretty clear that he had the potential to do something special. In all honesty, I don't think that the difference in results at present is a result of their differing educational pathways ... and I do think that Harris' course of action makes a lot of sense.

Clearly universities can develop talent to compete at ATP and slam level: Isner, Anderson, Devvarman, Johnson, Klahn, Rola, and Nedovyesov come to mind. But the key thing is that for most people, barring the "specials" (and all the players you have named - Kyrgios, Coric, Quinzi, Garin, etc - are in that category), they won't really know until they're 21 or 22 whether they have a shot at being a Challenger-level player, let alone a Tour-level one. Why should they, if they have any academic inclination at all, spend vast sums of money (theirs or the LTA's) trekking around playing futures matches, when they could be playing with a team, for free, with free coaching, and getting an education as well?

EddietheEagle · County player

A more factual, if pro-college, look at the arguments:-

http://assets.usta.com/assets/1/15/USTA%20College%20Varsity%20Analysis%20of%20College%20vs%20Pro%20FAQ.pdf

-- Edited by EddietheEagle on Saturday 12th of July 2014 08:01:43 PM

Spectator · All-time great

Really interesting document: thank you, Eddie!

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Marcus has the first set 6-2

And, yes, me too - thanks Eddie - very interesting. (And almost 4 years old now so a lot of the numbers have got even more persuasive)

-- Edited by Coup Droit on Sunday 13th of July 2014 01:25:52 PM

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Marcus wins 6-2 7-5

He didn't concede a single break point chance so well done him, well deserved - still blame poor Oliver Hudson though :::(((

And well done to Lewis for his best week in singles - PLEASE keep it up Lewis !

Oakland2002 · All-time great

Spectator I agree with all your points, regarding the elite players developing through the ITF. But I continue to question it's utility of developing lesser players to elite level. The success of American male tennis at present must also make you question whether or not it is holding the few success that do break through back. I feel and it is a personal view, that some of the successes would have been successful earlier and for longer if exposed to the reality of professional tennis life earlier. The rest of the world has caught up and the ITF, challenger process provides graduated exposure to increased ability if you progress but I accept the streets are not paved with gold and those that show the attitude and aptitude deserve support from the LTA

Harris is the elite of the American collegiate system he is at the No 1 programme in the US at Oklahoma, an institution which academically rivals Portsmouth and Liverpool John Moores Universities. He is unlikely to play a player ranked in the top 600 outside his holidays and similarly will not be rubbing shoulders with those elite players he came across regularly as a junior in development he will be flown off to play No 35 Boise state in sunny Idaho and similar for the next 4 years.

He can obviously hold a racquet and If he were a British player who had performed similarly as a junior this would not have been the course of travel I would have suggested. My comparison was with kokkinakis and not Krygios as you suggest, but accept that that could have easily been lost in the narrative. At 23 I don't think equivalent standard players will be in the same place and although there are some fantastic educational opportunities available at some institutions in the US and they are free to those on an athletic scholarship very few are able to make the most of them. They have been recruited by the college to play tennis and most of the extra tutoring available is to keep you in program not facilitate excellence. Harvard has an elite program, that probably is a covert marker of the standard of collegiate tennis as they find it very very difficult to compete at other sports. Apologise to Jerome and the relatively recent basketball success in March madness.

No slight whatever on the athletics programs at Boise intended, the football program there is a marker of what can be achieved against the odds by making the most of what you've got. I am afraid that is UK tennis and that was Oakland in 2002 look where they are now!